• Online Edition
  • About
  • Support The Sheet
  • Contact

The Sheet

  • News
    • Mountain Town News
    • Sports and Outdoors
  • Arts and Life
  • Opinion/Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Dining

MYTHBUSTER

  • by Jon Klusmire
  • in News · Online Edition
  • — 25 Oct, 2024

 Anti-tax crusaders are firing up a last-minute campaign to shoot down both Bishop Union High School bond measures on the Nov. 5 ballot. 

Yard signs have popped up around Bishop urging a “no” vote on Measures R and S and declaring “No New Taxes.” This despite lack of a no “argument against” the measures submitted for the Inyo County voter information guide. The booklet contains extensive information on the two bond measures and an “argument in favor” of the measures. 

Along with the signs there has been a notable whispering campaign citing some dubious reasons to vote against the two measures. 

Some of those whispers can’t be said out loud because they are wrong, according to the “MythBusters” presentation by BUHS Superintendent Katie Kolker at the Oct. 10 school board candidate forum. She addressed the “inaccurate information” circulating about various aspects of the proposed ballot questions. 

Kolker pointed out an oft-forgotten fact when it comes to the district’s property tax: The largest single landowner in the district is the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. That means LADWP will pay about 45% of both bonds’ total cost. 

A state ballot question asking for school construction funds could be fueling confusion about the need for the local bonds. State Proposition 2 asks voters to approve a $10 billion bond measure with the money dedicated to “repair, upgrade and construction” of the state’s K-12 school facilities. 

The myth is that the state bond money could be used for all of the BUSD building upgrades. Not so, said Kolker. If approved, the state funds will only provide a limited amount of matching funds for school renovations and upgrades. To get an estimated $12.6 million in state matching funds, the district has to have money set aside solely for facility work. If approved, Proposition 2 would get those matching funds delivered in about two years. If shot down, the state is still on the hook for providing matching funds, but it could take up to six years for that state money to arrive because of the statewide backlog of school upgrade projects (which is the prime argument for Prop. 2 – more money delivered faster). 

The rest of the “myths” were more straightforward. 

Yes, the district has spent all the Covid funds it received for facilities, Kolker said, and the only leftover Covid money is restricted to teacher training and can’t be used for any facility work. 

Yes, there is a project list, compiled by an outside consultant, which is available on the district webpage. 

Yes, if approved, the bond money can only be used for facility upgrades and renovations and cannot be used for district salaries or operating costs. A citizen advisory committee will oversee the spending. 

Yes, routine maintenance has been ongoing, but most large classroom buildings at the middle and elementary school are at least 50 years old and are wearing out, she noted. Plus, installing new electrical and HVAC systems, new roofs, new windows, and technology upgrades can’t be accomplished via routine maintenance. The elementary and middle school bond measure asks for $18 million to accomplish those major renovations and upgrades. 

The high school bond asks for $46 million, with about $30 million used to upgrade and modernize the main High School building which is 103 years old, and so are most of its plumbing, mechanical and electrical systems, she said. 

The district conducted an online survey asking residents what to do with the historic building. About 70% said keep it, upgrade it and continue to use it for classrooms, Kolker said. The other two options poll respondents soundly rejected were to tear the building down and build a new high school building or perform minimal upgrades and just use the huge building for office space, storage, etc., and not classrooms. 

If voters approve both bond measures, property taxes would increase by about $70 per $100,000 of a property’s assessed value, not market value. 

Jon Klusmire of Bishop is waiting to see if Bishop residents who said they love the historic, creaky old high school building will put their money where their sentimental mouths are and approve the bond measure. 

Share

— Jon Klusmire

You may also like...

  • Previous story NICE IDEA, BUT WHERE DOES IT GO?
  • Next story TRAMPLED & SHOT FROM THE HIP
  • Special Publications

  • Recent Posts

    • GET A PIECE OF THE ROCK
    • OBITUARY: BRIAN SIEBERT 1973-2026
    • SEAL OF APPROVAL
    • GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME … $1.1M
    • IT’S A HARD KNOCK LIFE FOR BEARS
  • Special Publications

  • News
    • Mountain Town News
    • Sports and Outdoors
  • Arts and Life
  • Opinion/Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Dining

© 2026 THE SHEET. DEVELOPED BY PENDERWORTH.